Islam and Domestic Violence

The reaction of the Muslim community to domestic violence is extremely ambiguous. On the one hand, there are organizations that do good work, especially in providing women’s shelters. On the other hand, we have a community that is in deep denial about the existence of spousal and child abuse within our homes. This results in a continuance of problems that, in any other community, would have been long ago resolved and in a chronic lack of funding for the organizations mentioned above.



This ambiguity has its root in two realities of the Muslim community: troubling textual sources that appear to give permission for domestic violence and the desire to maintain a “good” image for the community. The latter has its origins in the struggle for acceptance and for relevance that the Muslim community has engaged in since the fall of the Islamic world as a major world power. This impulse can be found in virtually any community, religious or non-religious, that has a stake in the battle for public opinion. While disturbing, it is not unique to Muslims.



The textual source is a uniquely Muslim problem. In the 4th verse of Surat an-Nisaa’ (Womankind) Muslim men are given the command “iḍribūhunna” in the context of dealing with a disobedient wife. This literally means “hit them” or “strike them.” The verb Daraba (he hit) is a favorite among Arabic Grammarians and is used often in giving examples of new grammatical forms. Zaidun Daraba Huseinan (Zaid hit Husein), unfortunately, can quickly become Zaidun Daraba Hindan.



Recently, I had a conversation with a friend who is a native Arabic speaker on this subject. Her objection was not just to the command itself, but to the ambiguity of the command. As Muslims apologists are quick to point out, the verb Daraba has more than one meaning, even in the Qur’an. In the name of apologetics or even reform one could use these alternate meanings to defang the command. But, as my friend pointed out, the very ambiguity is what does the most damage: it allows some to live with themselves and continue to maintain a religious system which gives permission to others to engage in domestic violence. She argued that this ambiguity makes it hard to believe that the Qur’an (or parts of it, at least) is a true scripture sent down by an Omniscient being. Such a being would know precisely how these ambiguities would be used for evil and would therefore avoid them.



There is a further problem with this command, however. Let’s assume the apologists are correct and this is not a reference to physical violence. Let’s go beyond them and assume it really is unambiguous and any interpretation which gives permission for physical violence is in bad faith and unauthentic. We are then forced to confront the problem of existential choice. This command and obedience to it affirms a system of values in which men have authority over women and have the right to admonish, instruct, and discipline them. It is a system of values in which women are reduced to permanent childhood and tutelage vis-a-vis men. This system of values finds its concrete expression in the legal systems of various Muslim countries. Even more “liberal” nations are deeply steeped in a patronising patriarchy, an phenomena illustrated in this report out of the United Arab Emirates.



I find this much more disturbing and destructive to faith than any empirical test of religion (i.e. Did Ancient Egyptians crucify people, was there a flood that killed Nuh’s people, etc.). When I was in college, I had a professor who was astonished and disappointed by my conversion. He brought up this verse and I was ready with my copy of Muhamad Asad commentary explaining all of the problems away. A tooth brush (miswak) was all that was meant and it was purely ceremonial! My professor told me (paraphrasing), “What right does a man have to subject a woman to such an undignified ceremony?” I had no answer for that and I still do not. No one has the right to strip away the dignity of another person, in the name of religion, the family, or pure egotism. As a thinking being endowed with a body, I affirm a set of values when I think and I act. That is the higher level of my responsibility, beyond the thoughts and actions themselves. Is it possible to affirm a set of values that avoids the injustices that are rampant in the Muslim community and yet still authentically Islamic? I now have serious doubts.